Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34159076›Full record

ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2021

Analyzing the learning curves of a novice and an experienced urologist for transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy.

Emanuel Darius Cata, Charles Van Praet, Iulia Andras, Pierre Kadula, Razvan Ognean, Maximilian Buzoianu, Daniel Leucuta, Cosmin Caraiani, Attila Tamas-Szora, Karel Decaestecker and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Emanuel Darius CataUrology Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Charles Van PraetUrology Department, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Iulia AndrasUrology Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Pierre KadulaUrology Department, Municipal Hospital, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Razvan OgneanUrology Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Maximilian BuzoianuUrology Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Daniel LeucutaMedical Informatics and Biostatistics Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj Napoca, Romania.
Cosmin CaraianiMedical Imaging Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj Napoca, Romania.
Attila Tamas-SzoraRadiology Department, Municipal Hospital, Cluj Napoca, Romania.
Karel DecaesteckerUrology Department, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Ioan ComanUrology Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Nicolae CrisanUrology Department, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of the current study was to evaluate and compare the learning curves of transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy for two urologists with different backgrounds (Operator 1: experienced, self-trained and Operator 2: novice, trained by a mentor/MRI reading courses).

methodsA cohort of 400 patients who underwent fusion prostate biopsy in our department was analyzed. The learning curves were assessed in terms of overall and clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) detection rates, percentage of positive biopsy cores/targeted and the percentage of PCa tissue on positive targeted cores.

resultsIncreasing trends were observed for both urologists in terms of all biopsy outcomes during the study time. For the novice urologist, a significant increase was observed for overall PCa detection rate, but not for clinically significant disease (25.44%, P=0.04/15%, P=0.145). Operator 1 showed an increasing diagnosis yield of clinically significant disease up to 104 cases. Similar cancer detection rates were observed when comparing the first and last biopsies performed by both operators. Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, PSA, prostate volume, lesion diameter and PIRADS score showed an increase of PCa detection with 51% for every 52 biopsies performed (P=0.022).

conclusionsWhen starting with magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy, mentoring and prostate magnetic resonance imaging reading training allow a novice urologist to demonstrate a good initial PCa detection rate. After about 52 cases, he reached a stable PCa and clinically significant PCa detection rate, that was similar to that of an experienced urologist.

Indexed as

Learning curvemagnetic resonance imagingMRI-US fusion prostate biopsyprostate cancer (PCa)

Identifiers

PMID34159076
PMCPMC8185669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.